Sunday, May 10, 2015

There
are some movies that satisfy you and fill you up, whereas others you
cannot help but to keep chewing and mulling over in your mind. Some
films, irrespective of quality and mastery, are indeed like junk
food. They give you satisfaction in the moment, but then down the
stretch of time, they lose their flavor. Others, however, are not for
temporary or instant consumption and full-filment, but are food for
thought and may become classics or cult films years down the road. In
my view, Birdman
and Boyhood
fall in the former, Foxcatcher
in the latter category.

Bennett
Miller's movie left me in a state of unease. I was impressed, but at
the same time I cannot shake it off. It has that je-ne-sais-quoi
characteristic that makes it stand out from the myriad other movies I
have seen. While I was immediately driven to write my impressions and
a review of Whiplash,
this one I was ruminating about and it has been lingering in my mind
for weeks now. Moreover, I was sharply inclined not
to write anything on it. But I cannot resist.

The
title is “catchy” enough; this man du Pont is intent on catching
foxes (whatever that means) and is not interested in saving children
from steep cliffs. The title is not merely an artistic pose, but
makes sense in the context of the incidents. For one, du Pont's
family was obsessed with hunting, whereas he was not interested at
all in traditional hunting; second, and more importantly,
“Foxcatcher” was the name of the wrestling training camp that
this millionaire created on his own private grounds.

This
is a film about wrestling, in the same way, Miller's previous film
Moneyball
was about baseball. The answer is it is not so much about the sport
itself; references to it are incidental. What Foxcatcher
is really about is ... well let us pause for a moment and not rush
things and try not to box fixed structures on a fluid and mesmerizing
film just yet.

The
film is about an odd - but in their own idiosyncratic and absurd way
fascinating - trio: Two brothers who are successful wrestlers, and a
creepy rich man who claims to love wrestling and wants to sponsor and
train them to further Olympic success.

From
the onset, we sense that the Schultz brothers have a tight
relationship. They care for each other, and they love the sport, but
they seem incapable of expressing their feelings. There are also
fundamental differences in their situations: one of them, David, has a
family; the other, Mark is lonely and lacks close
relationships. We see him live a desolate and lonely life, and the
call from du Pont may seem like a rescue from his dire situation.

Du
Pont's supposed motive is his patriotism. He thinks that America has
let down or back-tracked regarding promises to the sport of wrestling, and
he wants to, single handedly, put wrestling back on the map. He will
provide all the necessary expenses to prepare Mark Schultz for
further greatness, for his next Olympic medal.

All
this talk and the opulent grounds and wealth of his strange
benefactor make a very strong impression on young Mark Schultz's
impressionable mind. Mark soaks up du Pont's words and ecstatically
transmits them to his brother David, who is more level-headed and
rational and has his doubts vis-à-vis the millionaire's real
intentions.

First
off, it is inevitable, which a number of critics have pointed out, to
see this film as an examination and criticism of the American dream
and patriotism. Wrestling is not an American sport per se, but it
serves as an interesting metaphor of trying to pin down the
competition and to come out on top.

Attributes
of resilience and the die-hard and never-give-up attitude prevail
during the training sessions. These wrestlers underfunded and
overlooked by their government are given a chance to shine and win
over fans among the American populace by proving those narrow-minded
officials wrong, at least so the story goes according to du Pont who
is willing to put his own money, a mere slice of his grand fortune,
into this endeavor.

The
movie can be read as a criticism of misplaced patriotism and the
American dream. Just look at du Pont, the spokesperson and advocate
for these ideas. He has his own chopper and does cocaine on top of it
just before an important speech. To make matters worse, he offers his
protege wrestler Mark pinches of this white powder.

There
is, however, much more to this person. In real life, he was in fact
much worse, and Bennett Miller decided to dial it down for his movie
(Take a note Michael Bay!). We see du Pont buy major weapons and tanks
from the US military and simply by being rich, he has a number of
important government contacts. But his behavior is bizarre, and his
real motivations remain hidden. By presenting us such a flawed
character expressing such lofty ideas, one can assume that the
Australian director is subtly putting up a mirror to re-examine these
ideas in a clearer light.

What's
in it for du Pont? Is it patriotism that is his driving force? It may
seem so during his speeches, but there is something profoundly
mysterious and creepy about this man. It seems to be more than mere
service to the country; there is an underlying desire or hidden
motivation behind his decision to fund wrestling.

His
mother, the only family he has, is dead set against this sport, which she considers uncivilized and vulgar. Du Pont tries hard to impress
her to no avail. She is still in charge, especially when it comes to
managing their fortune, and du Pont follows her like a puppy, maybe
rebelling slightly here and there and once in a while, but he lacks
the guts and courage to break off in his own direction.

Furthermore,
there seem to be an unspoken homosexual attraction towards these
muscular and greasy men he surrounds himself with. Could he derive a
secret unacknowledged sexual attraction towards these wrestlers? The
movie slightly hints in that direction without however committing
itself to such an interpretation.

Everything
takes a turn for the worse, once du Pont's mother dies, and he is
given free reign to do as he pleases with his immense fortune and
power. In fact, he completely loses it and commits a horrible deed,
which I will not give away here.

Yet
throughout the film and regardless of our unease regarding this
bizarre man (and what a great nose plus brilliant acting performance
by Steve Carell), we cannot help but feel empathy for him. We feel
sorry how this man who is ironically buried under mounds of wealth
does not achieve happiness. In fact, most of his life, he has lived
in the shadow of his domineering mother and then, for whatever
reason, he has never found any satisfaction in life despite (or
because?) having anything he wants at the flick of a finger.

In
the film, we see that he literally suffers to see David happy with
his family, his wife and children. There is also a flicker of
resentment on his face how there are other more important things than
wrestling, fame, or money. And as they say, there are some things
that money cannot buy, and this may explain to some degree why du Pont
acts the way he does.

Yet
the movie, with this particular characterization especially, chills
me to the bones, and the “Foxcatcher” himself like an embodiment of a
half-forgotten horror film did show up in one of my nightmares and is
still making me shudder, while at the same time I cannot stop raving
about this brilliant film.

Google Website Translator Gadget

Goodreads

A simple and straightforward overview of psychoanalysis with a focus on child psychology. Anna Freud's style is clear, compassionate and engaging.
I was quite interested in learning about the differences between the psychoanalytic treat...

Each / either field (Zen Buddhism / Psychoanalysis) is fascinating on its own terms but one day I felt that they were intimately and intricately connected and that turns out to be true! Although the book as a brief and general survey mer...